REVIEW 5 cited by
How Much Backtracking is Enough? Exploring the Interplay of SFT and RL in Enhancing LLM Reasoning
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
How Much Backtracking is Enough? Exploring the Interplay of SFT and RL in Enhancing LLM Reasoning
read the original abstract
Recent breakthroughs in large language models (LLMs) have effectively improved their reasoning abilities, particularly on mathematical and logical problems that have verifiable answers, through techniques such as supervised finetuning (SFT) and reinforcement learning (RL). Prior research indicates that RL effectively internalizes search strategies, enabling long chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning, with backtracking emerging naturally as a learned capability. However, the precise benefits of backtracking, specifically, how significantly it contributes to reasoning improvements and the optimal extent of its use, remain poorly understood. In this work, we systematically investigate the dynamics between SFT and RL on eight reasoning tasks: Countdown, Sudoku, Arc 1D, Geometry, Color Cube Rotation, List Functions, Zebra Puzzles, and Self Reference. Our findings highlight that short CoT sequences used in SFT as a warm-up do have moderate contribution to RL training, compared with cold-start RL; however such contribution diminishes when tasks become increasingly difficult. Motivated by this observation, we construct synthetic datasets varying systematically in the number of backtracking steps and conduct controlled experiments to isolate the influence of either the correctness (content) or the structure (i.e., backtrack frequency). We find that (1) longer CoT with backtracks generally induce better and more stable RL training, (2) more challenging problems with larger search space tend to need higher numbers of backtracks during the SFT stage. Additionally, we demonstrate through experiments on distilled data that RL training is largely unaffected by the correctness of long CoT sequences, suggesting that RL prioritizes structural patterns over content correctness. Collectively, our results offer practical insights into designing optimal training strategies to effectively scale reasoning in LLMs.
Forward citations
Cited by 5 Pith papers
-
Blending Supervised and Reinforcement Fine-Tuning with Prefix Sampling
Prefix-RFT blends SFT and RFT via prefix sampling from demonstrations to outperform standalone SFT, RFT, and mixed-policy baselines on math reasoning problems.
-
T$^2$PO: Uncertainty-Guided Exploration Control for Stable Multi-Turn Agentic Reinforcement Learning
T²PO improves stability and performance in multi-turn agentic RL by using uncertainty dynamics at token and turn levels to guide exploration and avoid wasted rollouts.
-
RL-PLUS: Countering Capability Boundary Collapse of LLMs in Reinforcement Learning with Hybrid-policy Optimization
RL-PLUS is a hybrid RL approach for LLMs that combines internal exploitation with external data via importance sampling and exploration advantages to prevent capability boundary collapse and achieve gains on math and ...
-
Search, Fail, Recover: A Training Framework for Correction-Aware Reasoning
Pyligent trains LLMs to search, detect failures via task validators, and backtrack to recoverable prefixes, improving solve rates by 13–73 points over gold-only SFT on hidden graphs, Sudoku, and Blocksworld.
-
Conformal Certification of Reasoning Trace Prefixes
CROP applies conformal prediction to certify the longest contiguous prefix of an LLM reasoning trace that is guaranteed to contain no annotated errors under an exchangeability assumption.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.